Author Topic: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial  (Read 22927 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline John

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« on: July 16, 2014, 04:48:58 AM »
Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial

Judge queries whether Kate and Gerry McCann possess the requisite authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name.


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the damages case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and three other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action on the basis that the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The Judge decreed that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The Judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the Judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that, “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over, “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The Judge further considers that, “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision, “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the Court”.

The Judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an, “eminently judicial nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”. 

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd April 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the Judge has decided that the final Court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents, “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be, “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

70
« Last Edit: February 07, 2015, 06:36:25 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Anna

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2015, 09:51:52 PM »
Does anyone know, if the Wardship for Maddie was sorted out in the last session?
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline faithlilly

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2015, 10:05:11 PM »
Does anyone know, if the Wardship for Maddie was sorted out in the last session?

I believe that the McCanns still have to provide the court with written verification from the High Court that they are entitled to include her in the libel action Anna.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2015, 10:06:48 PM »
I believe that the McCanns still have to provide the court with written verification from the High Court that they are entitled to include her in the libel action Anna.

and where do you get that information from?

Offline Anna

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2015, 10:11:11 PM »
I believe that the McCanns still have to provide the court with written verification from the High Court that they are entitled to include her in the libel action Anna.

Thank you, Faith.
I knew that they had to produce the documents within 30 days I believe, after the closing arguments.
 Maddie will be ruled out of the proceedings, if they fail to provide the necessary proof.
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Anna

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2015, 10:22:48 PM »
and where do you get that information from?

Not the most informative, piece, Davel, but the best I could do at short notice.
We still don't know if the required information/documents have been received by the court, but I hope so.


''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Judge rules that Kate and Gerry McCann do not possess the authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name.


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates.



http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html

“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2015, 10:30:56 PM »
Not the most informative, piece, Davel, but the best I could do at short notice.
We still don't know if the required information/documents have been received by the court, but I hope so.


''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Judge rules that Kate and Gerry McCann do not possess the authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name.


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates.



http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html
Thanks Annna...interesting that this site which is close to amaral refer to the trial as a libel trial

Offline Anna

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2015, 10:36:10 PM »
Thanks Annna...interesting that this site which is close to amaral refer to the trial as a libel trial

Yes I noticed that too. The last appeal in 2010, was also called a libel trial.
It does indeed get a bit confusing .
 I don't believe the word "Libel" (as in law)exists there, it is "defamacao"=defamation, so all sorts get translated as "libel".
« Last Edit: January 18, 2015, 10:44:08 PM by Anna »
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2015, 07:01:44 PM »
I wonder if your own Montclair would verify the WOC issue. Which is true July, December or yesterday's.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 02:49:27 PM by John »
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2015, 07:15:02 PM »
People really should remember what they said. Seems no answer will be forthcoming so here is what Montclair said last July.

The matter of Madeleine being a WOC had been brought up earlier but only later did the judge ask Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer to obtain the relevant documents. He was able to obtain them and they confirm that she is indeed a WOC. In her ruling she stated that if the McCanns are unable to show that they had authorisation from the court to represent their daughter, she would then be forced to acquit all defendents with regard to the claim made in Madeleine's name. Now the ball is the McCanns' court and they were given 30 days from the date of the last hearing to present this proof.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4663.75
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 02:49:46 PM by John »
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2015, 07:46:50 PM »
8((()*/

People really should remember what they said. Seems no answer will be forthcoming so here is what Montclair said last July.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4663.75

How those of a certain persuasion hate those of a different persuasion and long memories ....

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2015, 01:25:24 PM »
Montclair, you appear unrepentant for (knowingly or unknowingly) spreading the lie that the McCanns' right to bring an action in Madeleine's name remains undecided.

Or if you have repented of that, I apologise ...
« Last Edit: February 03, 2015, 03:02:50 PM by Mr Moderator »

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2015, 01:33:32 PM »
Montclair, you appear unrepentant for (knowingly or unknowingly) spreading the lie that the McCanns' right to bring an action in Madeleine's name remains undecided.

Or if you have repented of that, I apologise ...

I must have missed that. Do you have a link to the confirmation from The High Court. I would like to read it.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2015, 03:03:30 PM by Mr Moderator »
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Montclair

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2015, 01:51:38 PM »
You appear unrepentant for (knowingly or unknowingly) spreading the lie that the McCanns' right to bring an action in Madeleine's name remains undecided.

Or if you have repented of that, I apologise ...

I would I repent for saying something that was true. The McCanns have 30 days as from 21 January 2015 to present the document from the High Court which authorises them to represent their daughter in the court case. When that document is then presented, all the lawyers have 10 days to present their written allegations.

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2015, 01:53:43 PM »
I must have missed that. Do you have a link to the confirmation from The High Court. I would like to read it.

Do you have confirmation Lisbon court hasn't already had it?

After all Montclair doesn't seen to want to answer to this she posted last July

The matter of Madeleine being a WOC had been brought up earlier but only later did the judge ask Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer to obtain the relevant documents. He was able to obtain them and they confirm that she is indeed a WOC. In her ruling she stated that if the McCanns are unable to show that they had authorisation from the court to represent their daughter, she would then be forced to acquit all defendents with regard to the claim made in Madeleine's name. Now the ball is the McCanns' court and they were given 30 days from the date of the last hearing to present this proof.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4663.75


Surely if this was correct Amaral would now be off the hook

There is nothing in the 37 points of the report either.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2015, 01:58:00 PM by DCI »
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/